Revisiting Alimony

[Toro]

The nature of marriage has changed dramatically over the decades. Women now make up almost half of the American work force. But alimony, a concept enshrined in ancient law, has remained remarkably constant. Now, the idea that a husband should continue to support his wife forever, even after the demise of their marriage—long a bedrock of divorce law—is being called into question. Pressures are mounting to change a practice that some see as outdated and unfair.

Several U.S. states are battling to place new limits on alimony and rewrite decades-old laws. In Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Oklahoma, lawmakers are pushing for measures like putting time limits on alimony payments, barring alimony if two divorcing spouses are on equal footing professionally, and ending or reducing alimony if the recipient commits a crime or cohabits with another adult in a romantic relationship. Lobbyists and activists are pressing for similar rules in Ohio, Florida, Arizona, Georgia and North Carolina.

In Massachusetts a bill backed by a group called "Reform Massachusetts Alimony Laws Now!" has 72 sponsors and would require a spouse receiving alimony to become self-sufficient, or attempt to, after a reasonable time. That would establish alimony as a temporary payment instead of a permanent entitlement, as is often the case now. A second bill, in the state Senate, would modify the law less radically by adding "duration" to the factors judges can consider when setting alimony payments.

The House bill would end the currently common practice of using the assets of a second spouse to determine the ability of a person to pay alimony. Alimony could only be adjusted upward for cost-of-living increases, and alimony obligations would end upon the retirement of the payer, though judges would still have the flexibility to take into account special circumstances.

The New Art of Alimony - WSJ.com

 

[strollingbones]

women's lib has worked well for men, hasn't it?

 

[Mr. H.]

women's lib has worked well for men, hasn't it?

Women want equality and liberation but, once achieved, insist on continually sucking the life out of the man they once depended upon. Is financial rape your vengeance or what?

You may have had a new life forced upon you, you may have chosen it yourself. Either way a woman's entitlement whether supportive or not ends at the point where you are able to support yourself and/or the children of the union. You aren't fueled by need, you're fueled by hate.

Men have rights too. Women should be made to account for every detail as are men.

Fuck you.

 

[Mr. H.]

Pardon the vile vernacular. No personal affront intended.
Beer talking.
But I will say I'm terribly bitter about the inequities of post-matrimonial recompense.
(Hangover talking)

 

[rightwinger]

women's lib has worked well for men, hasn't it?

As a matter of fact, it has.

Prior to womens lib, women had no job prospects. In a divorce, men had to support an ex-wife indefinitely with alimony.

Now, many women make more than their husbands or are at least able to find work to support themselves

 

[joshaln241]

See Bergen County Alimony Lawyer | Spousal Support Attorney Bergen County

 

[Jarlaxle]

Unless he snares a rich widow or heiress, any man that gets married needs his head examined.